House of Commons Hansard #115 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was commissioner.

Topics

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I understand that Bill C-280 passed in the Senate about 30 minutes ago.

However, that said, the government is committed to the principle of evaluating each case on its own merits and each individual's circumstances.

Before removals or deportations from Canada begin, individuals can ask for the pre-removal risk assessment to examine the risk they might face in returning to their home country, based on evidence that may not have been available at the Immigration and Refugee Board hearing.

During the time that the PRRA is going on, the removal order is stayed and that individual can remain in Canada, but if the assessment fails, removal procedures will resume. Under the single decision-maker model, the pre-removal risk assessment officer is an expert in matters of risk.

However, single decision-makers assess not only risk but also other--

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Order. The hon. member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert.

6:25 p.m.

Bloc

Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Speaker, this government wants to control everything, from which movies we watch to which brochures we read. And now, since the first of April, they have stopped updating the coordination of access to information request system, an important tool in obtaining information on how this government operates.

For the benefit of the people watching at home, I want to explain that the coordination of access to information request system lists, in one place on the Internet, all the access to information requests that are in progress at a given time. This tool enables the government to coordinate requests and, for example, ensure that the same request has not been made two or three different times. It is an important management tool. In processing these requests, it is important to have a list of all the requests that have been received.

This tool was accessible to the public, which meant that anyone could view it. It was obviously very useful for journalists, who used it regularly. It was also very useful for all the members in this House and their staff and assistants, but also to the general public.

It was an administrative tool, but also an important information tool that contributed to this government's transparency. The Liberals put this system in place. I do not say this to be unkind; I am simply clarifying for the sake of discussion.

If it is not in order to govern away from prying eyes, why then did this Conservative government kill this wonderful tool of democracy? Is this the transparency promised by the Conservatives during the election campaign?

In response to the question I asked on May 5, the Minister of Justice quoted a so-called specialist, whom he did not name, who said:

No other country maintains a government-wide database like CAIRS. CAIRS is the product of a political system in which centralized control is an obsession.

I do not know who said that. In fact, the Minister of Justice did not name the person, luckily, because I do not understand the correlation. I believe that the obsessive centralized control became even tighter when it was decided to kill such a tool. In fact, the Conservative government wants to centralize everything, control everything, and does not want to share this information.

There is nothing wrong with keeping lists of requests received. What is bad in and of itself for democracy is if this list is not shared with the individuals who want to consult it.

Control is not the issue here, but rather access to information. The more information is taken away and access to information denied, the more the government seems non-transparent and secretive. That is what we are currently seeing with the system for coordination of access to information requests having been killed by this government.

I will repeat my question: when will this government reinstate this wonderful tool?

6:25 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, first of all, many facts in the member's statement leading up to her question are clearly wrong. This proves that the Bloc is useless and has done nothing all the years it has been in Ottawa.

I welcome this opportunity to stand in my place and speak on the record of the government on access to information.

Access to government information allows Canadians to better understand the actions their government takes and to hold their elected officials accountable for those decisions. Accountability depends on knowing the information and options available to the government decision makers.

The government was elected to restore accountability and rebuild trust. That is why we introduced the Federal Accountability Act, which of course is the toughest anti-corruption law in Canadian history. The act strengthened access to information. It addressed the need to make government more transparent after years of Liberal corruption and backroom hijinks.

We expanded the Access to Information Act to include agents of Parliament, five foundations created under the federal statute, seven additional parent corporations and all subsidiary corporations. That is over 70 institutions in total and includes other organizations like the Wheat Board, the CBC and the agents of Parliament; 70 new organizations that were previously not covered by access to information but now are. We brought in only one new exclusion that was not previously in place and that was one that was asked for by the Auditor General on draft audits.

This is the biggest expansion of access to information rights for the Canadian people in a generation. Our record stands for itself. We are committed to promoting openness and transparency.

Let me turn to the coordination of access to information requests system, CAIRS. CAIRS is an internal database that was used by the previous government to contravene the very principles of openness and transparency for which this government stands. CAIRS was designed as an internal government tool to facilitate coordination of access requests made to government institutions. It is a database containing information on the requests, including the category of the requester and the text of the request.

The truth is that CAIRS was used by the previous government to control the flow of information. That is not my opinion; that is the opinion of leading experts on access to information. One leading expert said, “CAIRS is the product of a political system in which centralized control is an obsession”.

CAIRS was not designed as a tool to inform the public. In fact, Canadians had to specifically request information through ATI in order to get it when CAIRS was in place. That is probably why so few made the effort to use this tool. In fact, only 13 Canadians in total requested the information on a regular basis.

Furthermore, reporting was inconsistent and the information unreliable. Not only was the system not open to the public, when Canadians accessed information through ATIA requests, they could not even have confidence in the information they received and its accuracy.

My case speaks for itself.

6:30 p.m.

Bloc

Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Speaker, the member for Nepean—Carleton has it all wrong.

First and foremost, with regard to the usefulness of the Bloc, we are here to defend the interests of Quebec. We demonstrated this again a few minutes ago when this House adopted by a majority the motion of my Bloc colleague for Laurentides—Labelle, which recognizes Mont Tremblant airport as an airport of entry into Canada. This is a major victory for the Bloc Québécois

The Bloc Québécois won another battle for youth from the regions when my colleague had us vote on a bill that would reduce taxes for youth who return to the regions. The Bloc truly helps Quebeckers and they acknowledge this fact by voting for us time and again.

This member really has it all wrong. Last week, he had to apologize for comments that he admitted were not right. He still has it all wrong when he speaks of this government's transparency. Perhaps his government, in Bill C-2 on the accountability—

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board.

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member can say, if she wants, that our party did not go far enough in the Accountability Act to broaden the scope of the Access to Information Act. Nonetheless, during discussions in committee on this matter, her party did not suggest any other federal institution to add to the Access to Information Act. Our party was prepared to go further than all the opposition parties were.

I find this quite ironic because we are the government and normally governments are not prepared to expand access to information. Our government did just that. We kept our promise. We have added—

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:35 p.m.)